I think that the new standard should be: no tax reform without release of his tax returns. Let's make this a thing. Contact your Congresspeople and let them know they shouldn't vote for any tax measure until we know how it will affect the President's bottom line.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

I think that the new standard should be: no tax reform without release of his tax returns. Let's make this a thing. Contact your Congresspeople and let them know they shouldn't vote for any tax measure until we know how it will affect the President's bottom line.

This begs the question, since President Obama started WhiteHouse.gov petition (I believe) after this how long before President Donald (Investigate the Protesters) Trump, orders it taken down and all signatories there on investigated

_________________________
Vote 2018

Life is like a PB&J sandwichThe older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Oklahoma Sen. James Lankford (R) is joining calls for President Trump to release his tax returns, saying Trump should "keep his promise."

"[Trump] promised he would," Lankford said at a town hall Tuesday night in Claremore, Okla., when asked whether the president should share his tax returns, according to the Tulsa World.

"He should keep his promise," he added.

Calls for the president to release his tax returns were constant during the campaign and have picked up this week in light of Tax Day on Tuesday.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Mr Trump has always maintained he will as soon as the audit is over. What you guys failed to realize is people like him are under audit every year. With a 1000 page return and probably carry-overs and look-backs, he will forever be under an audit.

I suspect his statement is equivalent to the statement, he is above the acceptable norm for presidential candidates or he is going to do whatever the frak he wants to and everyone else can GFT.

So despite what some believe is "pressure", Mr Trump will not bend to the will of liberals and other scum <snarky snort snort>

What about a Congressional subpoena? Legal scholars will immediately note the Constitutional complexity in the request. Unless the current (or perhaps future independent and objective) investigations find enough evidence for probable cause of specific tax related information to the Russian-Trump campaign confluence, probably won't happen.

But you guys know the old saw .... wish in one hand and etc etc

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

The pressure, if it comes, will be on legislators. When tax reform can't get done, it will drag the whole party down. Until the threat is existential, the Republicans will, in the main, provide cover. If they see THEIR seats in jeopardy, however, expect actions to be taken.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Mr Trump is [fill in the blanks with a large book] and may be connected in some serious way with "The Russians" BUT that has nothing to do with a Republican Houde which is dysfunctional. You can blame Mr Trump for the failure of R&R if you want to, but the reality is the Republican House is idiot-ologically split with very little chance of of working together on any serious issues.

How in this context will failure to pass any serious legislation reflect on Mr Trump?

At some point I have to guess some folks will conclude idiot-ological solutions to our problems are not a path forward. That should scare these ideologues but it won't impeach Mr Trump. For that, the weak committees investigating better find more than circumstantial evidence. It better be the stone cold nuts.

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

Oddly though, the president always gets the blame for legislative failure.He's the great dealmaker and the man conservatives tasked with making America great again. Every time Congress fails it will land squarely on his shoulders.

Republicans don't care if he releases his tax forms and he won't.They don't care about his alleged Russian ties. Impeachment is off the table unless Democrats seize the Senate and House(possible but very unlikely) in 2018.

But there's where you are wrong: Impeachment has nothing to do with probable cause and normal criminal procedures. The House doesn't even need to claim that a particular crime has been committed. It only has to show that the President is acting unethically and in a non-Presidential matter, and Trump has already done that in spades. All of Trump's past dealings with lawsuits, fraud, etc. don't apply here because impeachment is not about normal crime. It is about HIGH crimes and misdemeanors, which are only things that can be done by someone with high office. Things like corruption, abuse of power, and dishonesty. All he has to do is use his position to benefit himself or his family, and you have grounds for impeachment. He has probably already committed hundreds of such acts because of his business activities.

If members of Congress in his adopted Party choose not to act, then that makes them just as guilty. Their political future will be destroyed by that co-conspiracy. Their jobs are threatened NOW.

impeachment would be the ultimate conclusion of all the evidence of which tax returns may be a part

the reality is conservatives don't care what the facts are since they operate in an alternate political universe .... one in which liberals lie .... the MSM lies .... etc. Thus when you say their jobs are threatened solely because Mr Trump is a liability, I don;t think that is valid.

The current special in the 6th suggests to me Republicans are fractured politically and ideologically. This was noted by many prior to the election and I think we see it in the 6th. However there may be a new component at play i.e. an energized opposition (to Mr Trump) movement.

Many Americans harbor an extreme distrust of the Federal government in no small part to the propaganda of the last 40 years. Mr Trump represents one of theirs at the helm. Compare Pres Obama's support at the same time in 2009 with mR Trumps support now - 84% v 85%.

The world has changed and I believe the thinking which analyzed the election in 2009 is no longer valid.

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

We shall see. They won't be in power forever. There might be enough of a backlash that they aren't in power for long. All of this alt-facts nonsense crumbles in the face of an activist attorney general and grand juries. People who crossed the line into criminal behavior may be indicted and convicted, even if their alt-viewpoint sees it as partisan politics now.

VERY FEW judges, appointed by either Democrats or Republicans have much patience with "alt-facts". It's like going into court with sovereign citizen arguments. You end up being removed or gagged for the duration of your trial, and then carted off immediately to prison.

Even if they are not indicted, they have to run with all the stuff on the internet that never goes away where they are supporting a disgraced traitor driven from office. In fact, I will predict a new generation of Ethical Republicans that try to replace all the discredited current crop.

The White House will release on Wednesday the “broad principles and priorities” of their plans to overhaul federal taxes, a White House official said Friday night, downplaying expectations that the Trump administration would reveal key details underpinning the plan.

I am a big believer in substantial tax reform, but what is being offered is not that, but a continuation of the effort, going back decades, to continue to funnel money to the best-off and burden those who actually work for a living.

Quote:

Neither Trump’s tax plan (the one from the campaign; he hasn’t offered a new one as president) nor the Better Way plan from House Republicans, which could play just as an important role in shaping the tax reforms that Congress ultimately passes, is designed to primarily help the middle class. Only 6.6 percent of the cost of Trump's plan goes to cuts for the middle fifth of taxpayers, households making between $48,400 and $84,300 a year, according to the Tax Policy Center. By contrast, a whopping 47.3 percent goes to the top 1 percent, and nearly a quarter goes to the top 0.1 percent, all of whom make over $3.75 million a year.

There’s little mystery why it’s been 30 years since the last comprehensive tax-reform law: Tax reform is a nightmare.

It takes extraordinary political focus, the capacity to withstand months of bureaucratic infighting, the fortitude to ignore relentless lobbying from organizations losing their favorite tax benefits, and devoted White House stewards who are prepared to guide the bill through this maelstrom for months, or even years. Trump and Republicans in Congress gave up on health-care reform after 17 days. The White House has already blamed the bill’s failure on the same representatives it will need to pass tax reform.

Rather than entering the nightmare, however, Trump's "Tax Experts" are suggesting a fantasy instead:

Quote:

President Barack Obama proposed lowering the corporate tax rate several years ago, but he also proposed raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans as a way to offset some of the lost revenue. This led to major blowback from many Republicans who saw it as a way of raising taxes. He also proposed limiting the deductions that the wealthiest Americans could claim, something that was also rejected.

Trump administration officials have said they will propose limiting some tax breaks, but this is not expected to be a big component of their plan. Instead, they are going to assume future economic growth caused by the tax cuts will create trillions of dollars in new revenue, a controversial assumption that many GOP congressional aides on Capitol Hill have cautioned against.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

When Bush did his tax cuts it adding, if I remember correctly, something like 200 pages to the existing system. As far as I can tell the Republican tax fix is yet another add-on to the existing system (all existing corp welfare will remain in place). I cannot imagine the number of pages that will be added this time around. We, obviously, need a complete overhaul - just not gonna happen, I fear. The current tax code is around 2500 pages long. On top of that there is something called the CCH tax reporter which is over 70,000 pages long and, apparently exists to explain the initial 2500 pages of the actual code itself. By the time the Republicans have finished their tax deal I wouldn't be a bit surprised to see the mess grow by thousands of pages. This, of course, also means that the system will become a book of mysteries and, probably, a bit mystical as well.

If nothing else our tax system provides a LOT of work. At the top level we have the congress, and their thousands of bureaucrats. I doubt, very much, that there is a single member of those august bodies that understand what they have wrought. Then there is the priest/accounting class hard at work trying to deal with a system no single human could possibly understand. The flock (thee and me) just bumble on, hoping somebody will fix the damned thing whilst, at the same time, understanding that it is only going to get worse. I can't even begin to imagine what happens when it simply overwhelms. It also serves to illustrate, on a daily basis, just how poorly we are governed, by those who constantly claim to be acting in OUR interests.

This is, incidentally, that results of the American Voting Public doing its thing and worshipping at the altar of perception whilst ignoring fact.

I dutifully did my taxes and submitted my 1040, and various schedules (so many extra forms!). I owed taxes this year for the first time in over a decade - in the hundreds ($342 on $3100 of "income" - all for SS and Medicare). None of the deductions I formerly took have any value anymore - mortgage, charity, medical, etc. Isn't it strange that I pay a higher percentage on the little "wages" I earned from self employment than on investment income (0.0%)/Capital gains? I should have quit working sooner!

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

"... they are going to assume future economic growth caused by the tax cuts will create trillions of dollars in new revenue, a controversial assumption that many GOP congressional aides on Capitol Hill have cautioned against."

Republicans have historically counted the chickens before the eggs were even laid.

_________________________
Vote 2018

Life is like a PB&J sandwichThe older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

The Laffer Curve is a real thing but it has a bell-curve-like shape. We happen to be on the upper half, so if they lower tax rates the government will collect LESS money in taxes, not more. That "cut taxes, collect more" effect only works when you are on the lower half of the curve.

Take us back to Reagan's tax rates and it might work.

In fact, that might be a good slogan for Democrats: "Let's go back to Ronnie's tax rates."

PIA, I agree with your Laffer curve analysis. Cutting taxes will no longer have a positive effect. Ironically, I agree that corporate rates should be lowered, but only if all the loopholes are removed. There really is no reason for large corporations to get favored treatment. It eliminates competition when competition is most needed. Startups and small businesses should get preferences.

Also, ironically, in Washington State the existing solar industry has manipulated the law to keep Tesla (Solar City) out. Solar City uses a "lease" model for its installations (keeping savings in its pockets), whereas in Washington only sales are allowed to accept government subsidies.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

The tax code is very complex in every respect. One would think taking money from one place and putting in another is simple but there are other considerations.

The easiest reform would be to remove all the special interest loopholes.

The 16th Amendment was meant to collect revenue, not manipulate the free market.

I so thoroughly agree.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Article I, SECTION 8, begins: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States[.] The remainder of the section provides what Congress can do with those monies. The implication, of course, is that Congress can only collect what it needs. But the greater implication is that the tax system is not contrary to the "General Welfare" of the citizenry.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

Quote:

The tax code is very complex in every respect.

Yes it is, but most of the complexity is necessary: There are blatant things in there designed to benefit single industries or even single companies, but those probably make up less than 1% of the tax code.

The vast bulk of the code is there to make tax collection fair in complex situations. Simplify the code and you will make tax collection UNFAIR in those complex situations. The result will be economic disruption because smart people will then exploit the loopholes the simplification creates.

The vast bulk of the code is there to make tax collection fair in complex situations.

These are special interests looking for benefits. Some are justified and others ... well .... it essentially allows some people to get richer at the expense of the people.

Here are some examples:credit for low income housing developmentsaccelerated depreciationdeferred income for multi-nationals

Just guessing but I would estimate it to be about $100B/yr in lost revenue.

I think if one wants to level the taxing field, one would take out all the code which makes people richer. When I get a deduct, it keeps me from getting poorer. Maybe that would be a criterion for starters.

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

>credit for low income housing developments

Really you object to that, when developers could build fancy houses or condos on the same plot and make a lot more money? If they were not compensated, there would be no low income housing.

>accelerated depreciation

I've used this several times on my farm. Straight line depreciation is just such a pain in the ass. Immediately expensing it every time I buy a new weedwacker or chainsaw is just so much easier for everybody. The paperwork for years of depreciation costs more than the item. The main advantage is it makes your tax return simpler by avoiding multiyear carryovers.

The one big loophole I can think of is treating hedgefund managers income like long term capital gains. THAT costs us billions.

I think the simplest reform is to treat income as income, period. Lottery, wages, sale, investment, dividend, interest, inheritance... Who cares how?

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

I don't object to people making oodles of money but I do object when the government is provides the cover for that and doesn't get a penny for its effort on behalf of a small group of people.

The question is, is low cost housing for the poor a part of government providing for the general welfare? If it is then government must figure out how to implement their contractual obligation. Making some people richer is not the solution. The solution is for government to provide that service in the most effectively.

You point to the hedgefund crew but the reality is real reform should touch every section of the code. Such comprehensive and intensive reform may require scrapping the current code and re-writing done only by tax experts.

Sometimes you gotta tear it all down to build it better

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

I have been a long time proponent of divorcing lobbyists from any public officials with any private contact or contributions. If any special interest has something to sell make it public and transparent.

Maybe we have not advanced far enough to be able to write tax law ... maybe the anarchical conservatives are right ... maybe it should be a Darwinistic adventure

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

And that indeed is a major problem with the tax code. Reagan guys worked long and hard to make sweat work derived income more taxable than other passive sources (stocks and bond income--less depreciation and repairs) and they shall not give up that preferential lowered taxed streams without a fight. No? One might ask--- why?

Because- these people (holders of publicly traded equities) are--Job! Creators. Just as the bible says. I mean--if I bought a stock after an initial offering, and it ascended from there, I have contributed to the well being of the company--no?..... Actually...... not, but it sounds and feels good--

But why should that matter?................ Never mind...

It’s a beautiful system. Jump aboard!!

_________________________
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

That might be true if companies only sold stock in an IPO and people only bought stock at the IPO. Of course both of these assumptions are false. I've been investing for over 35 years and I only bought stock at an IPO once. And that was a great risk! Who ever thought internet stock trading could make it big?

I've been invested for a long time in a BDC that offers new shares almost every year. When people buy the shares, that gives the company working capital so they can run their business and add to shareholder's dividends.

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

Quote:

How does cutting taxes for a corporation induce me to buy their product if I don;t need it?

Maybe they lower prices or increase advertising using the tax cut money. Then you can afford their product or become aware of it. Market forces do exist. There are only some markets were demand is inflexible or prices are not visible before buying, like health care. When you go to Amazon or Home Depot online and sort by price, you are participating in price selection.

But even if that is true, the assumption that government tax collection will increase because of lowering tax rates is only true to a point. Obviously, lowering tax rates to zero results in zero tax collection by government. Tax rates versus tax income is described by a bell curve and we are on the wrong side of the curve to get that response. If they did this it would blow a massive hole in the deficit, but Republicans always do just that. Remember: Deficits don't matter if a Republican is in the White House.

LOL ... people who "know" me think I am a bit peculiar. Madmen are simply blowing the cash if they are trying to induce me to buy. I buy quality when required, otherwise the cheap stuff is ok. I don't spend $100 on a gastronomical orgasm when all I want is some food to fill the belly.

So I am confused. How many people will Sec Mnuchin hire in response to his tax windfall? How many people will Exxon-Mobil hire as a result of their new found bankroll?

Will Mr Trump's company be able to finance new RE ventures based on his tax proposals? I can answer yes to that but still wonder where the jobs are.

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Maybe they lower prices or increase advertising using the tax cut money.

Nope. If you read the history, what they do is buy back stock and reward CEOs.

Quote:

We already tried a tax break to bring home foreign earnings. It failed. In 2004, Congress enacted a one-time amnesty allowing U.S. companies to repatriate earnings parked abroad at a bargain tax rate — 5%, rather than the top rate of 35%. The idea was for them to spend the money on jobs and domestic investment.

Instead, corporations spent the money on stock buybacks to benefit their shareholders and to fatten executive pay. A Senate subcommittee report in 2011 determined that the 15 biggest companies taking advantage of the tax holiday, including Pfizer, Hewlett-Packard and IBM, actually cut jobs and reduced research spending. The treasury lost $3.3 billion in revenue over 10 years, the panel found.

_________________________A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

yeah but this time they will do something different (there is some definition about sanity or some such etc etc)

both Sec Mnuchin and Cohn said the middle class would benefit but they did not say how much .... personally I think all conservatives should want rich folks to get richer than Ft Knox, so they can contribute more money to elect more conservatives ... perpetuate the cycle ... etc

I see a plan for the greatest transfer of wealth America has ever known and no a single sole has a pitchfork in their hands

_________________________ignorance is the enemywithout equality there is no liberty

I believe that EVERYBODY should pay taxes. I also believe that the fact that there are many, that pay no taxes, due, at the top, to clever accounting, and the bottom where there is no money to pay said taxes. The problem with those on the bottom is that they don't care, they don't care enough to vote, they don't care about the news, they just do-not-care. The poor don't vote because they believe they don't count (that's the usual excuse). The only time they do vote is when somebody organizes them, like the raising of the minimum wage and even that doesn't last all that long. This also applies to the young vote (18 to, say, 22) For the most part they don't have much and also do-not-care.

The trick, I think, is to figure out how to force them to pay SOME taxes. It doesn't have to be much but that, I believe, will tweak their interest enough to get them act in their own best interest and actually vote.

Until we get ALL the electorate to vote our Democracy has a serious problem. Given the shift in employment coming down the path (loss of same), increase in homeless, etc. its really important that EVERYBODY weighs in when its time to vote. I have never understood why people don't understand that if they don't vote the elected know it and ignore them and they get screwed over. Then, every now and then, somebody gets them stirred up and they march. When is now coming down the path, however, is going to significantly change unemployment, and homelessness. Unless somebody figures out how to deal with it (in a humane way) its going to get very bad.

The industrial revolution created the Luddites. I fully expect the same sort of thing to happen in spades this time, and its gonna get serious. We have a government that not only denies anything to do with weather change but refuses to prepare for the results. The same is happening in regard to future employment. Between the two, in about 20 years I expect the nation to be little armed conclaves at battle with each other. I won't be alive then but I fear for my grandchilren, and great grandchildren as they are going to have really hard time due, mainly, to the seriously incompetence of the current electorate.

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

Sure, we should all just go down a list of government activities and check the ones we agree with. Then only pay taxes to support those items. But of course, everybody would get to do that, so some things you like would get very meager funding and some things you hate would get huge funding.

pondering_it_all
old hand
Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6832
Loc: North San Diego County

Quote:

Until we get ALL the electorate to vote our Democracy has a serious problem.

You seriously want the mentally ill and intellectually-challenged people to vote? Would you want them as your bus driver?

I think democracy can only work with an educated voter base. Those who opt out of education should not vote. We can add a little competency test portion to the voter registration form. Nothing opinion-based, just simple verifiable facts. Get too many wrong and you sit out this election.

Given the results I am not convinced that the majority that voted in the last were not victims of mental problems. That being said there are a lot of things the mentally disabled should not be doing, like having guns. I guess that is, however, ok with our current congress.

I am not sure about picking and choosing where tax dollars go but I have consistently suggested that gov take a prime time hour of pbs, every night, and use that hour to explain just what various agencies do and, at the same time, allow viewers to vote on said agency. It might actually get really interesting given that gov itself really doesn't know how many agencies it actually has! https://cei.org/blog/nobody-knows-how-many-federal-agencies-exist (there are a lot of responses to this one when googled). Yet again; a serious politician would be more interested in FIXING gov rather than changing it (I also believe that the basis of most gov undertakings started for a good reason but has, perhaps, lost focus of the mission)

I am not sure about he military-industrial thing. Its necessary that we protect ourselves but, I think, we have gone a bit overboard. However, its the elected that created and support this stuff and they are the ones that should be called on it. Under the present administration, however, where the president is, as far as I can tell, using his office to garner more wealth from, basically anybody he can, and apparently getting away from it, who can blame the elected from jumping on that bandwagon and getting a little bit for themselves. (its pretty obvious that the nation itself comes in second)